2003 Caterham 7 vs. 2008 Mazda 6
To start off, 2008 Mazda 6 is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Caterham 7. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Caterham 7 would be higher. At 1,999 cc, 2008 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Caterham 7 (160 HP @ 7500 RPM) has 17 more horse power than 2008 Mazda 6. (143 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Caterham 7 should accelerate faster than 2008 Mazda 6.
Because 2003 Caterham 7 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2003 Caterham 7. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 Mazda 6, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2008 Mazda 6 (177 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 1 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Caterham 7. (176 Nm @ 5750 RPM). This means 2008 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Caterham 7.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Caterham 7 | 2008 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Caterham | Mazda |
Model | 7 | 6 |
Year Released | 2003 | 2008 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1794 cc | 1999 cc |
Horse Power | 160 HP | 143 HP |
Engine RPM | 7500 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 176 Nm | 177 Nm |
Torque RPM | 5750 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 80 mm | 87.5 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 89.3 mm | 83.1 mm |
Top Speed | 209 km/hour | 208 km/hour |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 3110 mm | 4620 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1580 mm | 1790 mm |
Vehicle Height | 810 mm | 1640 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2230 mm | 2680 mm |